On Sat, 2020-10-10 at 11:38 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:48:09AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:47 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > > I think adding the .owner everywhere would be good, and perhaps we can
> > > > somehow put a check somewhere like
> >
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:48:09AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:47 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > I think adding the .owner everywhere would be good, and perhaps we can
> > > somehow put a check somewhere like
> > >
> > > WARN_ON(is_module_address((unsigned long)fops) &
From: Johannes Berg
> Sent: 09 October 2020 09:45
>
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 08:34 +, David Laight wrote:
> >
...
> > Does it ever make any sense to set .owner to anything other than
> > THIS_MODULE?
>
> No. But I believe THIS_MODULE is NULL for built-in code, so we can't
> just WARN_ON(!fops-
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:47 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > I think adding the .owner everywhere would be good, and perhaps we can
> > somehow put a check somewhere like
> >
> > WARN_ON(is_module_address((unsigned long)fops) && !fops->owner);
> >
> > to prevent the issue in the future?
>
> That w
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:19:02AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:16 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:06:14AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > We used to say the proxy_fops weren't needed and it wasn't an issue, and
> > > then still implemented it. Dunno
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 08:34 +, David Laight wrote:
>
> > I think adding the .owner everywhere would be good, and perhaps we can
> > somehow put a check somewhere like
> >
> > WARN_ON(is_module_address((unsigned long)fops) && !fops->owner);
> >
> > to prevent the issue in the future?
>
>
From: Johannes Berg
> Sent: 09 October 2020 09:19
>
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:16 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:06:14AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > We used to say the proxy_fops weren't needed and it wasn't an issue, and
> > > then still implemented it. Dunno. I'm not
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:16 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:06:14AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > We used to say the proxy_fops weren't needed and it wasn't an issue, and
> > then still implemented it. Dunno. I'm not really too concerned about it
> > myself, only root can hold
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:06:14AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> We used to say the proxy_fops weren't needed and it wasn't an issue, and
> then still implemented it. Dunno. I'm not really too concerned about it
> myself, only root can hold the files open and remove modules ...
proxy_fops were nee
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:03 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> For lots of debugfs files, .owner should already be set, if you use the
> DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE() or DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE() macros.
>
> But yes, not all.
Right.
You didn't see the original thread:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201008
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 09:53:06AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> [RFF = Request For Flaming]
>
> THIS IS PROBABLY COMPLETELY CRAZY.
>
> Currently, if a module is unloaded while debugfs files are being
> kept open, things crash since the ->release() method is called
> only at the actual release, d
[RFF = Request For Flaming]
THIS IS PROBABLY COMPLETELY CRAZY.
Currently, if a module is unloaded while debugfs files are being
kept open, things crash since the ->release() method is called
only at the actual release, despite the proxy_fops, and then the
code is no longer around.
The correct wa
12 matches
Mail list logo
